Single payer is a death sentence for seniors

Interesting

I did some reading on this and it is a complete furphy

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ezekiel_Emanuel
And your graph seems to be from some weird arse right wing stormfront type site

https://xcontra.wordpress.com/tag/general-electric/

 

Where are you getting your "statistics"?
http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview/id/706270.html

 

Isnt it amazing how in the middle years the left considers the pre born and the very old expendable.

 

I repeat

 

in any discussion about the longevity rates of countries, it would be intellectually dishonest to omit respective obesity rates.

 

More than 60 cents of the US healthcare dollar is spent on premature babies and the elderly.

 

Aren't you on Medicare? Isn't Medicare single payer? Isn't it the GOP that wants to get rid of/privatize Medicare, because it is too expensive? Aren't you concerned about the federal deficit, but happily using government benefits?

So many questions, the answer to which could destroy RW bubble thinking.

 

As Emanuel co-wrote,

At $2 trillion per year, the U.S. health-care system suffers much more from inefficiency than lack of funds. The system wastes money on administration, unnecessary tests and marginal medicines that cost a lot for little health benefit. It also provides strong financial incentives to preserve such inefficiency.

By building on the existing health-care system, these reform proposals entrench the perverse incentives.

Moreover, even plans that reduce the number of uninsured today may find that those gains will disappear in a few years if costs continue to grow much faster than gross domestic product. As costs rise, many companies will drop insurance and pay the modest taxes or fees that have been proposed. States will find that costs exceed revenue and that cuts will have to be made.[19]

Emanuel said that replacing employer-based health insurance and programs like Medicaid would "improve efficiency and provide cost control for the health-care system."[19]

Emanuel and Fuchs reject a single-payer system, because it goes against American values of individualism. "The biggest problem with single-payer is its failure to cohere with core American values. Single-payer puts everyone into the same system with the same coverage and makes it virtually impossible to add amenities and services through the private market

continued

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ezekiel_Emanuel

 

Ah the fear factor of campaigning. This senior doesn't care, I'm gonna die anyhow..

 

Under the GOP plan, without individual mandate, they just have no insurance at all, and then go to the emergency room when sick. The cost is then distributed over the people who DO have health insurance, raising their premiums.

 

Do you even know who Dr. Emanuel is or his bottom line?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ezekiel_Emanuel

 

Yes that does factor in because when the government is reponsible for paying for your health care suddenly they become interested in keeping you healthy by encouraging exercise and advocating for healthy diets........

 

wow. I don't even know how to...

wow.

 

I wondered that myself.

 

Seniors already have single payer health care and like it.

 

We have had advertising for YEARS about staying healthy

We were one of the first countries in the world to introduce mandatory seat belts BECAUSE the government worked out how much flail cheat injuries from steering wheel impacts was costing them. The government becomes very interested in preventative medicine - which is not a bad thing

 

After the hospital sues you and takes everything you own..

 

I think that's probably true of every health care system, dispite the hard work that the right wingers on this thread are doing to promote fear.

 

Well., what do you expect? That's the GOP's idea of how to handle health care.

 

I know since companies don't want the burden..

 

Not really

And this is where the "death panel" has been blown out of all proportion. I have worked both private and public. And I have worked in a system where private was paid for by the public purse no questions asked. In the latter it is a standing joke that they will perform cardiac bypass surgery on 98 year olds regardless of what else is wrong with them - an keep them almost indefinitely in ICU because, hey! They are going to get paid no matter what.
Private is nearly as bad - I have seen people beggared despite the fact that it was a hopeless case - it is difficult to say no when it is a loved one
Public has limited resources - therefore we triage EVERYTHING. Sickest first. Those with the most to gain above the least to gain (so a sick child gets priority over a terminally ill nursing home patient)

Very few have cause to complain. Where I work we have to fly patients out to bigger centres so I am always explaining that thier flight may be delayed if there is a sicker patient or a sick child elsewhere and everyone that I talk to understands that

 

I use the VA and since Trump we have seen a decrease in access to medical care or a delay in operations.

 

Insurance companies incentivize cost saving behaviors by applying additional fees to risky individual behaviors. Would it be okay for government to assess our potential costs to The Collective™ and levy additional taxes on fat individuals? drug addicts? alcoholics? skateboarders? What about additional taxes on homosexual males? (STDs like HIV/AIDS are extremely expensive to treat and the gay community [still] represents the highest transmission rate).

 

Applying increased costs does NOT "incentivise" people

Which works best - carrot or stick?

 

All seniors are ALREADY ON SINGLE PAYER!

It is called MEDICARE!